• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Iran a Greater Threat Than ISIS?

Is Iran a Greater Threat Than ISIS?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 37.5%
  • No

    Votes: 20 62.5%

  • Total voters
    32
Conspiracy theories aside, the Saudi government does not fund AlQ. Nor do they send death-row inmates to fight in Syria (that was a load of crap from a conspiracy website). The source for Monte's quote does not appear to be the real wiki and it openly conflated private and state funding.

Iran is, in fact, the largest source of state funded terrorism.

Still waiting for a link or source.
 
Yes, and I have one of their uniform shirts in my closet that I traded one of their soldiers for a beer - and that was in Iraq, deep inside Iraq, after we captured them and we were waiting on their ride to the rear area.

So, again, yes. Plus, they fund, train and equip Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Front and many others. They bring them to Iran, train them, equip them and then send them back. These groups are proxies for Iran.


Keep in mind that as an invading force with reasons still unknown to me, with numbers too large to be deemed terrorist all the while, that's exactly what you were doing in Iraq, masquerading as liberators my ass, yeah all this and that you have an issue with a few Iranians coming to aid in defense of their fearing neighbor? And you call Iran a nation of terror when that's what we do buddy, we F stuff up and call it a mission accomplished, b'cause that's exactly what was achieved.
 
Keep in mind that as an invading force with reasons still unknown to me, with numbers too large to be deemed terrorist all the while, that's exactly what you were doing in Iraq, masquerading as liberators my ass, yeah all this and that you have an issue with a few Iranians coming to aid in defense of their fearing neighbor? And you call Iran a nation of terror when that's what we do buddy, we F stuff up and call it a mission accomplished, b'cause that's exactly what was achieved.

Bear in mind that Beau's a soldier, he bears a different responsibility in such things than the politicians responsible for policy. Otherwise, yes I agree with you that in the pursuit of "our interests" we have done nothing different then Iran, and a whole lot worse, and more widespread throughout the world. And our leadership has supported and used militant Islamic groups as proxies from Carter on through in the ME. With the support of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, which gave rise to the Taliban, Reagan's arms sales (against the wishes of congress) to Iran, Bush's training of the MEK in Nevada (a group on the US terrorist list) and more recently Obama's use of Al Qaeda to topple Gaddafi, (just look at the mess Libya is in now) to the smuggling of arms out of the Benghazi annex to the insurgents in Syria via Turkey who was charged with the vetting that allowed the Islamic State to come into possession of US arms. No, the finger we're pointing at Iran and Russia for that matter has three pointing back at us.
 
Yes they do when they own you in response to just about every silly post you make.

At least I don't believe The United States trained the Khmer Rouge. :lamo
 
That statement is bigoted and wrong.

All countries with nuclear weapons are a threat to the USA. Some are a bigger threat than others.

Nothing bigoted, nor wrong.
 
Bibi didn't tell us anything we didn't already know. Heck, Bush told us about Iran over 13 years ago.

However, BECAUSE it was Bush saying it, nobody believed it. Bush was right about a lot of things...even Obama agrees with him. That just means there are a lot of dumbass people out there who don't have a clue.

That is rather laughable being the single biggest check on Iran 13 years ago was the Sunni dictator next door, Saddam Hussein. Had we left Saddam in power and continued the policy of containment, Iran would be no more of a threat today than it was in the 90s. ISIS would not be a problem today either.
 
You only wish the world was in black and white, dont cha?
suyfxg.jpg

Christianity is the world's largest religion by the numbers.
 
That is rather laughable being the single biggest check on Iran 13 years ago was the Sunni dictator next door, Saddam Hussein. Had we left Saddam in power and continued the policy of containment, Iran would be no more of a threat today than it was in the 90s. ISIS would not be a problem today either.

Exactly. And the same is going to hold true for Libya and Syria.
 
Iran has the regional/world agenda. Hamas and Hez are puppets of Iran. Does ISIS have puppets in other countries and Africa? I don't think so. I don't think ISIS has any ability to project power whatsoever; Iran does.

You can't expect ISIS to have any puppets yet.
If ISIS would have had 50% of Iran's power, than we would be talking for another subject here.

That statement is bigoted and wrong.

All countries with nuclear weapons are a threat to the USA. Some are a bigger threat than others.

All countries with nuclear weapons (including US) are a big threat to this planet.
 
Neither is a threat to American sovereignty in any remotely meaningful way.

It is just American cowardice of the masses (with Neocons encouraging them) that sees these two as the boogie man.

Plus, the economy refuses to properly recover (with the income disparity growing), so the Dem leaders want something to distract the ignorant masses from the virtually stagnant economy during election time. So ISIS is that distraction.
 
Recently Netanuahu stated at the UN General Assembly that Iran is a greater threat than ISIS. Do you agree with this statement?
Video can be found here: [h=1]Netanyahu: Iran poses greater threat than Islamic State[/h]

Possible and it depends on how one looks at that area. Terrorist threats and immediate destabilization of the area, ISIS is definitely the immediate threat. Iran is a long term threat and Iran's potential for havoc to the area is more powerful. I would put Iran in the category of the old USSR as an nemesis to both us and the region. They seem to use covert means at exporting their influence and once they attain the bomb, there will be little we can to to them in Iran. We will be stomping out their fires they start all over the area. But that is a little off in the future. Iran's leaders seem to weigh risks like the leaders of the old USSR before doing anything, ISIS leaders do not, ISIS leaders are more of the maniac type, unstable, where Iran's seems to be more level headed, saner if you will.

ISIS is here and now. The greater threat today, but not tomorrow. Today's problem, but not tomorrows. But make no mistake, Iran is a slowly growing giant.
 
Possible and it depends on how one looks at that area. Terrorist threats and immediate destabilization of the area, ISIS is definitely the immediate threat. Iran is a long term threat and Iran's potential for havoc to the area is more powerful. I would put Iran in the category of the old USSR as an nemesis to both us and the region. They seem to use covert means at exporting their influence and once they attain the bomb, there will be little we can to to them in Iran. We will be stomping out their fires they start all over the area. But that is a little off in the future. Iran's leaders seem to weigh risks like the leaders of the old USSR before doing anything, ISIS leaders do not, ISIS leaders are more of the maniac type, unstable, where Iran's seems to be more level headed, saner if you will.

ISIS is here and now. The greater threat today, but not tomorrow. Today's problem, but not tomorrows. But make no mistake, Iran is a slowly growing giant.

Saddam Hussein was a good check on Iran. But a "slowly growing giant"????
 
The only reason why ISIS and Iran are a threat is because we keep trying to antagonize them. They wouldnt be threats to us if we just left them alone...
 
The only reason why ISIS and Iran are a threat is because we keep trying to antagonize them. They wouldnt be threats to us if we just left them alone...

Containment worked fine when Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and Assad were in power. US policy in the ME is responsible for the rise of the Islamic State.
 
I think both Saudi Arabia and Israel are larger threats than Iran, by far. I do not see Iran as a threat.

Israel, really?

Besides scraps with Palestine, not much going on there these days. And I trust Israel a thousand times more than somewhere like Iran.

You only wish the world was in black and white, dont cha?
suyfxg.jpg

While agree it's silly to think all Muslims nations are threats to humanity. It's pretty obvious the Islamic world sorely lacks the ability to unleash any sort of global military campaign if they were all violent, it'd be a suicide mission at best.
 
Last edited:
Of cause .... if Iran gets the bomb they Will use it, either themselves or through one of their proxies.

bnjjbjb.jpg
 
At least I don't believe The United States trained the Khmer Rouge. :lamo

I don't believe it I know it from first hand information. And it doesn't get anymore reliable than that. It's not my problem if you are naive enough to think everything you are told by your government is true, or historians are privy to clandestine operations.

And I could care less if you don't believe me.

Btw one of the historical accounts of the post Ft. Devens, Mass doesn't have the 10th Special Forces there. But not only was it there from about 1968 to sometime later, I was there too as a military dependent. I remember when the 10th relocated from Bad Tolz, Germany to Ft. Devens. So much for the accuracy of alleged military historians.
 
How many Iranian terrorist on the 911 planes? How many Saudis?

I suggest you look at any of my posts on this forum about the Saudis and their involvement in world terrorism. In fact, you can ask Montecresto, that "liked" your post, with whom I have had numerous conversations about them.

However, they are in no way as dangerous, as a country, to the US and the world as the Iranian Ayatollah and Clerics are, who actually run that country and have complete control of their terrorist, military and nuclear programs.

The Saudis use private funds more than use a structured, official, government program to train, fund, equip and provide planning and operational support for terrorist groups around the world.

The Saudis are not true allies (friends), the Saudis have Islamist radicals within the royal family... but... the Iranians are far worse and far more dangerous.
 
That is rather laughable being the single biggest check on Iran 13 years ago was the Sunni dictator next door, Saddam Hussein. Had we left Saddam in power and continued the policy of containment, Iran would be no more of a threat today than it was in the 90s. ISIS would not be a problem today either.

I think it is rather impossible for you to say that.

Do you seriously think Saddam would have prevented Iran from working to develop nuclear weapons? Do you think he would have prevented Iran from funneling money to Syria and various terrorist organizations?

I have to say that I think you are living in a dream world.
 
The only reason why ISIS and Iran are a threat is because we keep trying to antagonize them. They wouldnt be threats to us if we just left them alone...

I think Clinton probably thought the same thing in regard to Al Qaeda back in the 90's. Look what that got us: 9/11.
 
How many Iranian terrorist on the 911 planes? How many Saudis?

How many Saudis over-ran the US Embassy in Teheran? How many Iranians?
 
I don't believe it I know it from first hand information. And it doesn't get anymore reliable than that. It's not my problem if you are naive enough to think everything you are told by your government is true, or historians are privy to clandestine operations.

And I could care less if you don't believe me.

Btw one of the historical accounts of the post Ft. Devens, Mass doesn't have the 10th Special Forces there. But not only was it there from about 1968 to sometime later, I was there too as a military dependent. I remember when the 10th relocated from Bad Tolz, Germany to Ft. Devens. So much for the accuracy of alleged military historians.

10th Special Forces Group (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Back
Top Bottom